In general, this invention relates to the field of taxidermy cutting instruments, namely, those instruments which are used in the cutting and mounting of animals. Specifically, it relates to such instruments as they can be used for professional taxidermy purposes as well as portable instruments such as may be appropriate for field use. It also provides novel methods through which taxidermy functions can be achieved. These functions can include field dress cutting and actions appropriate to the preparation and preservation of the results of hunting activities.
Taxidermy is a field which likely has been in existence since man first learned how to hunt. Certainly its techniques and instruments have been the subject of improvement for many years. Throughout this century a number of improvements have been created which relate to the specific instruments used in taxidermy-type of applications. Over 40 years ago, M. V. Cromoga invented a skinning knife. This device was designed to address some known problems such as the device becoming fouled with hair, flesh or pieces of skin during the taxidermy process. The Cromoga invention, U.S. Pat. No. 2,906,021 shows that for many years those in the art had known some of the problems unique to and experienced by the taxidermy field.
Similarly, over 25 years ago, improvements were made on even that basic design. In U.S. Pat. No. 3,839,788 to Addis, improvements were addressed. More fundamentally however, as both the Cromoga and Addis inventions demonstrate, a variety of specialized tools may be needed to efficiently achieve the results desired. Perhaps what makes this field somewhat unique with respect to others which require some sort of cutting instrument, is the fact that in taxidermy applications, a variety of specific types of actions are required. These can range from splitting to trimming, to shaping, and the like. Each of these actions, and indeed each animal and location on the animal, can have specific requirements and unique challenges. For instance, in the act of splitting--that is, the separation of the epidermis from the dermis, or perhaps the upper portion of the viscera from the lower portion of the viscera--it can be a challenge to not only cut cleanly and uniformly, but also to be able to avoid damage to the meat or other anatomy below that which is desired to be cut.
This can be particularly challenging in a caping operation. In caping, the hide is desired to be separated from a location such as at the horns of an animal down the back of the neck to a lower location. In this type of operation not only is the need for a uniform and continuous cut desired, but there is the challenge of seemingly inevitable binding and fouling of the instrument as the cut proceeds causing uneven cutting. In spite of the fact that this persistent problem was recognized at least over 40 years ago, and in spite of the fact that this problem might be considered to have been attempted to be addressed in the Cromoga invention, the problem has persisted to this day. Additionally, because an important component of the entire taxidermy operation is proper field dressing and preparation, it has been desired not only to solve these problems but also to address them in a manner which provides an instrument which can be easily transported and which most optimally is a micro cutting-type of tool, that is, one of an extremely compact nature. Interestingly, while each of these problems and issues was well recognized by those skilled in the art for decades, until the present invention, no single tool seemed to optimally combine the appropriate capabilities and functions so that the various problems could be more optimally addressed.
As mentioned, the problems which this unique field has faced range from the practical to the operational. On the practical side it has been a desire to provide a maximally compact instrument which, while extremely small, does not compromise the ability for positive and precise control during its use. These two competing needs are particularly interesting as they may have been viewed (prior to the present invention) as having required a trade off from one to the other. As the present invention shows, this perception was not correct; it is possible to achieve both without an "inevitable" tradeoff.
On the operational side, the need for accurate and clean incisions has been somewhat of a challenge because in a taxidermy operation, unlike a medical-type of operation, hair and the like is not to be removed prior to making the incision. Thus, it has been a constant challenge to provide an instrument and a technique whereby the material on the surface of the skin does not obstruct or bind the incision on the hide itself Interestingly, while this aspect was acknowledged and attempted to be addressed in the Cromoga invention, both it and the subsequent Addis invention each failed to recognize a key component to achieving the desired goals. Thus, while others had considered the problem and even addressed some of the components which now achieve the desired results, until the present invention no one had fully appreciated how the various components could be appropriately combined to achieve as successful a tool as the present invention. Thus, the present invention represents not just a minor advance over the prior art nor a gradual improvement in the prior art but rather, it represents a different approach which can be viewed to some degree as critical to effectively achieving the various goals desired.
The degree to which the taxidermy field has viewed its own problems as unique to it is evidenced to some degree by the fact that a variety of other cutting inventions have been made in other fields and yet their various features have not, to a large degree, been considered fully relevant to the unique challenges and demands of the taxidermy field. There has been over a century of effort for a variety of cutting tools as appropriate to cutting twine and the like. Over 75 years ago Gregory, in U.S. Pat. No. 1,379,864, had invented a twine cutter in the shape of a ring. This was in spite of the fact that prior to and in the early 1900s, other ring based, twine cutters had been invented. These included inventions such as that disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 579,655 to Saladee, U.S. Pat. No. 681,978 to Richardson, and U.S. Pat. No. 647,862 to McLaughlin. These ring-based devices each represented improvement in their specific area, that of twine cutting. None of those various devices, though, apparently were viewed as particularly appropriate to the unique challenges of the taxidermy field. They do, however, seem to represent the small degrees of improvement which those involved in at least one other field have acknowledged.
Similarly, a device designed specifically for cutting plants such as flowers and the like at an appropriate angle was invented by Davis in U.S. Pat. No. 5,038,479. This relatively recent patent (1991) perhaps shows how each field can sometimes be viewed as having its own unique problems for which individual solutions apparently need to be fashioned. The specialization among fields is perhaps most highly shown in U.S. Pat. No. 3,014,506 to Crimmins in which a unique device for manipulating bundle straps is shown. As can be readily understood, this specialized device clearly has limited applicability to other fields. The present invention may in hindsight show how beneficial an expanded perspective can be to the taxidermy field. It should be understood, however, that because the taxidermy field has little in common with manipulating a bundling strap or the like, the value of expanding on concepts from other fields was not fully obvious. As the Cromoga invention demonstrates, while there could in hindsight be viewed some degree of similarity between various aspects of the various twine cutting devices and the Cromoga invention, this similarity did not generally appear to have been viewed as applicable to the challenges of a taxidermy-type of operation.
In spite of the fact that the various problems, challenges, and desires had long been known for the taxidermy field, and in spite of the fact that the implementing arts may in hindsight have been considered to be available to some degree, those in this field had not, prior to the present invention, been able to satisfy the needs and appropriately combine elements to achieve an instrument such as that of the present invention. It may even have been that those involved in the taxidermy field did not fully appreciate the nature of the problem or even that a problem existed. For instance, while the Cromoga and Addis inventions had attempted to solve some of the problems inherent in a long, continuous cut, it may be true that those involved in using such instruments simply accepted that problems such as binding and now precision cutting were inevitable, and that they could not be cleanly solved.
The present invention shows that by simply not accepting that the problem was inevitable and by fully appreciating the problem, it was possible to achieve a solution such as now available. Interestingly, even those attempts 25 and 40 year ago had not been expanded upon to solve such problems. To some degree, this may have been a result of a failure to fully understand the nature of the problem or to cope with the difficulties existing with these problems. In fact, as the present invention demonstrates, efforts such as those by Cromoga and Addis may have actually taught away from the direction of the present invention. To some degree it may even be true that the results can be considered unexpected to those skilled in the art who may have been lead to believe that solutions lie in the directions shown in the Addis and Cromoga inventions or who might have been lead to believe that the problem itself had difficulties which were to be considered inevitable. Thus, until the present invention no one had provided a precision micro cutting tool for a taxidermy application which could not only be compact but which could permit precise control throughout the entire operation and achieve the precise cutting desired without binding and with a minimal need for hand applied pressures.